You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

Welcome to the eG Forums!

These forums are a service of the Society for Culinary Arts & Letters, a 501c3 nonprofit organization dedicated to advancement of the culinary arts. Anyone can read the forums, however if you would like to participate in active discussions please join the society.

Chicago restaurants can no longer sell the pricey liver delicacy that most Chicagoans can’t afford, have never tasted and probably never will, under an ordinance unanimously approved at today’s City Council meeting over Mayor Daley’s derisive objections.

Chicago restaurants can no longer sell the pricey liver delicacy that most Chicagoans can’t afford, have never tasted and probably never will, under an ordinance unanimously approved at today’s City Council meeting over Mayor Daley’s derisive objections.

OHMYGOSH... I didn't read the article very carefully, but I don't remember seeing an implementation date... does anyone know when the law/ordinance takes effect?

It is extremely sad. I wonder how restaurant owners and chefs in Chicago are reacting to this. In addition, I wonder if anyone who is considering opening an haute cuisine or hyper-modern (or whatever it is called these days) restaurant in Chicago would think twice.

Chicago probably has way too many steakhouses for its own good and the restaurants that use foie gras do so sparingly. I mean it is not like there is a restaurant that specializes in foie gras. Speaking of which, what is the name of the place in Montreal that does.

Luckily, in this case, the ignorance of the Chicago city council only extends to the city's borders. We'll continue to enjoy foie gras served in the suburbs, at least for now. Although, I don't see the state's legislators as being any less ridiculous.

Lousy, pandering politicians. Next thing you know, they'll be telling us who we're allowed to f*ck.

Luckily, in this case, the ignorance of the Chicago city council only extends to the city's borders. We'll continue to enjoy foie gras served in the suburbs, at least for now. Although, I don't see the state's legislators as being any less ridiculous.=R=

Schwarzenegger...

I supppose it would be too much to ask Achatz, Tramonto, Bowles, etc... to move out? Oh say, to foie gras friendly Kansas City... just kidding... sort of...

You can't claim to ban foie gras because it's inhumane and not go after other inhumane foods (no WAY am I getting into a debate over what's more or less inhumane than another, though) that are perceived to be less exclusive.

Reverse snobbery has been put into law. Or ordinance. Whatever.

Edited by Megan Blocker, 26 April 2006 - 02:40 PM.

"We had dry martinis; great wing-shaped glasses of perfumed fire, tangy as the early morning air." - Elaine Dundy, The Dud Avocado

Veterinarians and animal rights activists have described in graphic detail how geese and ducks suffer while being force-fed to create the enlarged liver delicacy. They’ve made comparisons to the mistreatment of prisoners at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison.

Good God, this is rediculous! How anyone can approve this new law based on arguments like this one is beyond me.

I'm thinking about the place that Chicago has carved out for itself in the culinary universe over the past decade and this news is so depressing; 50 ignorant politicians doing whatever they can to make sure that investors, chefs and diners think twice before doing business in Chicago. Nice, really nice.

I'm sorry to say that in many ways, this all comes back to Charlie Trotter. He lent a lot of credibility to the "anti" crowd's ridiculous arguments about foie gras and I believe that if it were not for him, we wouldn't be facing this news today.

Leave it to our City Council. In other cities, they might regulate a food product because it might not be good for the residents (and no, I'm not going to get into a diversion about the nutritional profile of foie)...but today, in Chicago, they banned one because it wasn't good for the birds from which the product is made.

Speaking of which, what is the name of the place in Montreal that does.

Where's Ling when you need her? Any other Montreal residents out there? I would love to know!

u.e.

Au Pied De Cochon is the place in Montreal featured most recently in Bourdain's No Reservation. Looked like heaven to me...

YES! It is Au Pied du Cochon. Their speciality is foie gras stuffed in PIG TROTTERS! They have duck in a can--duck cooked in a can, with foie gras. They have FOIE GRAS POUTINE! I am going to Montreal just to eat at this restaurant someday!

Also, the chef was featured in Gourmet magazine about 2 months ago. He said they ONLY use venison in the restaurant--venison in ALL dishes instead of beef, b/c he doesn't like the flavour of North American beef. VENISON! FOIE GRAS! I've gotta get to this restaurant....

I'm sorry to say that in many ways, this all comes back to Charlie Trotter. He lent a lot of credibility to the "anti" crowd's ridiculous arguments about foie gras and I believe that if it were not for him, we wouldn't be facing this news today.

I just emailed Mayor Daley's office asking if he intended to do anything to nullify the ban, especially given his comments noted in the Sun-Times article. Is it worth encouraging others to write or would it be merely tilting at windmills (or pissing into the wind, or...[your expression here])?

Gene Weingarten, writing in The Washington Post about online news stories and their readers' comments: "I basically like 'comments,' though they can seem a little jarring: spit-flecked rants that are appended to a product that at least tries for a measure of objectivity and dignity. It's as though when you order a sirloin steak, it comes with a side of maggots."

"A vasectomy might cost as much as a year’s worth of ice cream, but that doesn’t mean it’s equally enjoyable." -Ezra Dyer, NY Times

So based on the Chicago City Council's "reasoning" - and I use that term as loosely as aldermanic bookkeeping - all parts of the foie gras bird should be banned - not just the offending liver. That means no more duck breasts, legs confit, trimmings in sausage - and don't forget the fat. Alderman Joe Moore, sponsor of the ordinance, claims that it won't cost the taxpayers a nickel or affect city services. And how's that going to work? Are there going to be vigilantes confiscating your duck fat fries?

I'm sorry to say that in many ways, this all comes back to Charlie Trotter. He lent a lot of credibility to the "anti" crowd's ridiculous arguments about foie gras and I believe that if it were not for him, we wouldn't be facing this news today.

Trotter Boycott anyone ?

Not sure this is Charlie Trotter's fault - he has said repeatedly that his decision to not serve Foie Gras is a personal choice, and he doesn't believe it should be banned or restricted in any way. He doesn't believe politics should enter the debate, period. He had a personal choice on the matter that got widespread press - he would be the last person to claim himself an advocate on the issue.

Isn't there some sort of law in North Carolina saying you can't serve any meat cooked red or pink? I can't remember if that's how the law reads, but that's how the waitress described it to me when I wanted a simple burger medium rare. Nope, couldn't get it. Illegal. But I never asked them to take care of that one itty bitty little part of my life. They'd be better off taking care of the really big things. Still, at least the concern was for the humans ingesting the stuff. Perhaps more care should be put into the care and feeding of the animals we eat so that they're not dangerous to us. I don't like to eat meat that isn't locally and, if possible, organically grown. But that's still all about me, which I think is just fine. But the goose? This is arbitrary and pandering. I look forward to hearing if there's any serious backlash from the right-to-eat bunch in Chicago.

Lonnie

"It is better to ask some of the questions than to know all of the answers." --James Thurber

I'm sorry to say that in many ways, this all comes back to Charlie Trotter. He lent a lot of credibility to the "anti" crowd's ridiculous arguments about foie gras and I believe that if it were not for him, we wouldn't be facing this news today.

Trotter Boycott anyone ?

Not sure this is Charlie Trotter's fault - he has said repeatedly that his decision to not serve Foie Gras is a personal choice, and he doesn't believe it should be banned or restricted in any way. He doesn't believe politics should enter the debate, period. He had a personal choice on the matter that got widespread press - he would be the last person to claim himself an advocate on the issue.

You know, I'm not sure either. But, whatever his intentions, if he hadn't been so vocal about his personal choice, the folks who wanted to see this enacted would have had a lot less fuel for their fire. His comments gave their extremist agenda a certain amount credibility it would have otherwise lacked.

Speaking of which, what is the name of the place in Montreal that does.

Where's Ling when you need her? Any other Montreal residents out there? I would love to know!

u.e.

I believe Ling is from Vancouver

Oops, so she is... sorry Ling! Really, I'm not one of those American-centric folks who lump all Canadians into the same city!

But, I guess that didn't keep the ever-knowing Ling from jumping in with excellent info:

YES! It is Au Pied du Cochon. Their speciality is foie gras stuffed in PIG TROTTERS! They have duck in a can--duck cooked in a can, with foie gras. They have FOIE GRAS POUTINE! I am going to Montreal just to eat at this restaurant someday!

Also, the chef was featured in Gourmet magazine about 2 months ago. He said they ONLY use venison in the restaurant--venison in ALL dishes instead of beef, b/c he doesn't like the flavour of North American beef. VENISON! FOIE GRAS! I've gotta get to this restaurant....

You can't claim to ban foie gras because it's inhumane and not go after other inhumane foods (no WAY am I getting into a debate over what's more or less inhumane than another, though) that are perceived to be less exclusive.

Reverse snobbery has been put into law. Or ordinance. Whatever.

Exactly. If they're going to do this, then they should also ban Tyson chicken, non-free range beef, and mass produced pork. Idiocy.

-Sounds awfully rich!-It is! That's why I serve it with ice cream to cut the sweetness!

What might hit the city where it hurts is if the National Restaurant Association moved its show elsewhere in protest.

That might have an impact.

But really, I don't see how they can enforce this. If a restaurant puts "duck liver" on the menu and claims it isn't foie gras, and shows a receipt labeled "natural duck liver," how are they going to determine that the duck was force fed?